25 votes

DOJ Argues International Treaty Can Trump the Constitution

"Justice Department attorneys are advancing an argument at the Supreme Court that could allow the government to invoke international treaties as a legal basis for policies such as gun control that conflict with the U.S. Constitution, according to Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas.

Their argument is that a law implementing an international treaty signed by the U.S. allows the federal government to prosecute a criminal case that would normally be handled by state or local authorities."

Continue reading:



For Liberty:


Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Agenda 21 =(

It circumvents the Republic form of government via treaties, 'agreements' and 'partnerships' with NGOs. Non-goverment government. Giving the power that is meant for elected officials to those who will move the agenda further. And nobody is batting an eye because? Grant money. The strings attached to all the grants are twisted into the rope that will hang (hung?) the Republic.

Regional Science.

meekandmild's picture

Any elected official or any government employee who

forgoes constitutional law to vote for international law violates their oath of office (Title 5 USC §3331) and is considered an act of treason and sedition. 18 USC § 2384 (2000)

Yep. And treason during war time is a capital offense.

We can use the existing designation / state of perpetual war (LOL! the fake / fedgov-sponsored "War on Terror") for our own good... to warrant the legitimate use of the ultimate penalty against the very criminals who conjured up this BS war to bolster 1. military-industrial complex and banker profits, 2. ramped-up domestic tyranny / police state apparatus, and 3. the expansion of their precious global empire. Send the traitors to Hell, I say.

(And there are some of us who yearn to don the black hood of the executioner, should the "system" fail to appropriately administer Justice. The time for blood fast approaches! Happy Halloween....)

What would the Founders do?

the power of the U.N. marches

The power of the U.N. marches on unopposed because U.S. citizens have no standing in law to oppose it. They are the direct subjects of Congress. Traditionally, Congress, and the federal government, has no ability to bind the peoples of the several States by any legislation. Once the 14th Amendment came into being, the peoples from the States were no longer the peoples OF the states but rather the people (singular) of the United States, the agent for the Union, the Federal Government.

Take home lesson: State Nationals have standing in law because of the way in which the hierarchy of power and authority operates within the Union. They are also imune from the actions of Congress because they have no representation in the political system. U.S. 14th Amendment federal citizens, conversely, are not part of the union, thus have no standing, but are subject to every whim of their governmental masters in Congress.

Get out while you still can. Read The Red Amendment. See below.

~ Engage in the war of attrition: http://pacalliance.us/redamendment/

"I say... to the opinion of

"I say... to the opinion of those who consider the grant of the treaty-making power as boundless: If it is, then we have no Constitution. If it has bounds, they can be no others than the definitions of the powers which that instrument gives." --Thomas Jefferson to Wilson Nicholas, 1803.

meekandmild's picture

State's Attroney Generals need to file charges of treason

on Eric Holder.
What ever happened with the indictment of holder by the Citizens Grand Jury?

he pardoned himself

he pardoned himself

...and so the power of the UN

marches on...unopposed.


The DOJ has already proven what they know about the law by thinking they were within the law to sell guns to drug cartels!!!The DOJ knows jack shit about the constitution!!!

If you agree that certain

If you agree that certain federal laws can override state laws and that state laws can override local/county laws and so forth ... then yeah international treaties can override national laws.

Localism is the key - Bigger geographical jurisdictions should always have lower precedence than smaller jurisdictions, without exception.